Clay Minerals, (2013) 48, 749–758

Influence of the mineralogical composition

on the properties of adobe blocks from
Aveiro, Portugal
C. S. COSTA1,*, F. ROCHA1, H. VARUM2 AND A. VELOSA3
1
University of Aveiro, Department of Geosciences, GeoBioTec Geobiosciences, Geotechnologies and
Geoengineering Research Center, Campus Universitário de Santiago, 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal, 2 CEC/FEUP - Civil
Engineering Department, University of Aveiro, Portugal, and 3 GeobioTec Civil Engineering Department,
University of Aveiro, Portugal

(Received 4 April 2013; revised 6 November 2013; Editor: João Labrincha)

AB ST R ACT : Earth materials have been used in the form of adobe or rammed products for the
construction of load-bearing walls in buildings. In Portugal, the adobe has been used predominantly
on the central coast, particularly in the Aveiro district. Although many old adobe buildings in Aveiro
have been abandoned, some of them can be refurbished with minor maintenance and repair works.
Representative samples from typical adobe blocks, from various constructions in the region were
collected and characterized for their mineralogical composition, particle size, aggregate content,
water uptake, durability and strength. These basic properties provide a basis for the development of
adequate interventions, preserving the characteristics of the buildings. This study compares the main
characteristics of adobes from two different locations (Anadia and Murtosa). The most important
differences between the two groups of adobes are the particle size distribution, the mineralogical
composition, the water absorption and the mechanical and durability properties. The study improved
the knowledge of the traditional construction methods and will enable decisions for rehabilitation of
adobe buildings to be made. Knowledge of the main characteristics of adobes allows those
participating in the rehabilitation process to obtain the basis for the rehabilitation and conservation of
old buildings.

KEYWORDS: Earth construction, adobe, mineralogy, clay minerals, Aveiro, Portugal.

Approximately 30% of the world population lives in main techniques namely rammed earth (‘‘taipa’’),
buildings made of earth materials. The earth adobe and wattle-and-daub (‘‘tabique’’), (Silva et
construction offers economic and environmental al., 2013).
benefits especially when used in developing In general, the adobe blocks were made with
countries where material costs overlap labour humid sandy soil which, once mixed and moulded,
costs and where other construction materials and were dried in the sun. For improving their
technologies may not be available (Fratini et al., mechanical performance the inclusion of lime or
2011). natural fibres, such as straw, was frequent. The
The earth construction includes different building current adobe blocks dimensions, despite the
techniques; for example, in Portugal, there are three existence of numerous typologies depending on
use, are ~0.45 m60.30 m60.12 m when used in
houses and ~0.45 m60.20 m60.12 m when used
in the construction of walls (Silveira et al., 2012).
* E-mail: [email protected] Adobe is an extremely simple form of earth
DOI: 10.1180/claymin.2013.048.5.07 construction and with this technique the shrinkage

# 2013 The Mineralogical Society

750 C. S. Costa et al.

associated to the construction of large structures is METHODS

avoided. The bricks can be cast from a great variety
of soils. However, the clay influences both the Acid dissolution removed the soil binder and
humidity intake and swelling of adobe bricks and created a residue composed of the aggregate
may keep moisture in the walls. In this sense, the fraction. Adobe samples of ~50 g were dried at
clay content should be sufficient to promote 110  5ºC until reaching a constant weight. The
workability but should not be very abundant carbonate fraction, mainly lime which is often
because the associated swelling and shrinking may added to adobes, was dissolved in 20% HCl and the
damage the walls (Burnough, 2008). An adobe sample was agitated prior to filtering. An approx-
building can last hundreds of years and it is totally imate value of the binder/aggregate ratio was
recyclable. This behaviour increases the present obtained, since the acid dissolution technique used
interest in adobe as environmentally friendly totally dissolves carbonates but may only partially
material for sustainable construction (Calabria et dissolves soluble SiO2. The residue obtained was
al., 2009). dried until reaching a constant weight. Particle size
In Portugal, earthen materials have been used in analysis of the aggregate fraction was performed by
load-bearing walls in the form of adobe or rammed dry sieving on the insoluble residue obtained from
earth for the construction of buildings especially in acid dissolution, corresponding to the aggregate
the southern and central coast. Most of the adobe fraction, using the E196-66 series for analysis of
buildings are confined mainly to the central coast, soil samples, with the largest sieve corresponding to
particularly in the Aveiro district. The adobe a 19 mm opening. The sand fraction between 0.075
construction in these locations has economic and and 0.050 mm and the silt and clay fractions were
environmental benefits, because the raw material quantified by an X-ray sedigraph (Micromeritics1
(soil) is sourced in situ (Ciancio et al., 2013). Sedigraph 5100).
In Aveiro, there has been an obvious degradation Mineralogical studies were carried out on the
and abandonment of many adobe buildings; <2 mm and <2 mm (clay) fractions of the samples
however, some of these old buildings can be with X-ray diffraction (XRD). The mineralogical
rehabilitated, with minor maintenance and repair composition was determined with random powder
works. Over recent years, particular attention has mounts for the <2 mm fraction and with oriented
been given to rehabilitation in order to preserve and samples for the clay fractions. The clay fractions
protect this heritage. were separated by sedimentation according to
Adobe has been used in several types of Stokes law, using 1% sodium hexametaphosphate
construction: rural and urban buildings, many of solution to avoid flocculation. For the preparation
which are still in use; walls for the delimitation of of oriented clay mounts, the suspension was
properties; water wells; churches and warehouses. sedimented onto a thin glass plate and dried in
The use of adobe construction in the Aveiro district the atmosphere. XRD measurements were
reflected the properties of the existing available raw performed with a Philips PW 3050 and a X’Pert
materials in the region. The principal raw materials PW 3040/60 equipment using Cu-Ka radiation.
applied were sand, clayey earth and lime (Silveira Scans were run between 2º and 60º 2y (random
et al., 2012) and there is an evident heterogeneity powder mounts) and between 2º and 20º 2y
of the adobes, linked to the geographic distribution (oriented clay mounts) in the air-dried state, after
of the available resources. previous glycerol saturation and heat treatment
The study of the mineralogical composition and (300ºC and 500ºC). Qualitative and semiquantita-
properties of the adobe yields a better under- tive mineralogical analyses followed the criteria
standing of these materials, their heterogeneity recommended by Schultz (1964), Thorez (1976) and
and of their degradation mechanism. This char- Mellinger (1979). Semiquantitative estimation of
acterization is essential for the rehabilitation of old the principal minerals, was obtained from peak
buildings, by highlighting options for the selection areas of the specific reflections and weighted by
of compatible materials in any conservation action. empirically estimated factors, according to Galhano
The purpose of this study is the mineralogical, et al. (1999) and Oliveira et al. (2002).
textural and mechanical characterization of ten The methylene blue test was performed following
adobes from the Anadia area and ten from the standard NP EN 933-9 (2002). Methylene blue dye
Murtosa area in Aveiro district. solution (10 g of anhydrous dye/L) was added
 Adobe blocks from Aveiro, Portugal 751

progressively until the test sample no longer size distributions are in evidence (Fig. 1). The first
adsorbed the dye. The methylene blue value was group is composed of samples with a Ø50 of
calculated in g of anhydrous dye per kg of the 0.425 0.85 mm, the second group represents the
<2 mm fraction of the aggregate. samples with a Ø50 between 0.85 and 2 mm, and
Capillary water absorption was performed on finally the third group of samples has a Ø50
cylindrical samples extracted from each adobe, between 2 and 4.75 mm.
taking into account water intake and subsequent The Murtosa samples also consist of three groups
drying. This specific testing procedure was devel- with distinct particle size distributions (Fig. 2).
oped at LNEC (Veiga, 2005). Cubic samples of 20 A first group with a lower Ø50 (between 0.25 and
specimens were submitted to compressive strength 0.425 mm), that represents samples with finer
tests, using a universal mechanical compression particle size, an intermediate group with Ø50
testing machine (Shimadzu Autograph AG 25 TA). between 0.425 and 0.85 mm and a third group
This test was made with a 50 N/s simple with coarser samples having Ø50 between 0.85 and
compression. 2 mm, which features a dispersed sample behaviour.
The Geeolong test was used to determine the The particle size distribution was based on acid
durability of adobe blocks. This test consists of dissolution with HCl. The fraction of coarser
adding dropwise a certain amount of water from a particles in the Anadia samples clearly decreases,
height of 400 mm using a soaked felt over a compared to the original samples after acid
specimen placed at an angle of 30º. The test ends dissolution (Fig. 3). Moreover all samples have
when the water volume reaches 100 mL, which comparable particle size distributions. This beha-
usually happens after 30 min. The degree of erosion
encountered is given by the depth of wear caused
by the fall of water on the adobe block. Water
TABLE 1. Percentage of the insoluble residue, mean
depth erosion greater than 15 mm signifies that the diameter of fine fraction, and MB results.
specimen should be rejected (Silva et al., 2013).
The durability of adobe buildings is dependent on
appropriate maintenance and repairs that are Sample % Ins. res.* Ø50 MB
compatible with the original construction, because (mm) (g MB/kg
it is extremely important to study the characteristics fraction 0/2)
of adobe blocks from different buildings (Torgal & A2-1 87 12 0.3
Jalali, 2012). A2-2 89 12 0.6
A3-1 92 11 0.6
A3-2 89 8 0.5
RESULTS A3-4 88 12 0.7
A8-1 84 19 0.3
Acid dissolution to evaluate binder/aggregate
A8-2 85 17 0.6
ratio A8-3 86 9 0.8
A8-4 89 12 0.7
After acid dissolution the percentage of the A8-5 88 15 0.5
insoluble residue for the samples from Anadia Average 88 12 0.6
ranged from 84 to 92%, and for the samples from
Murtosa between 86 and 93% (Table 1). Therefore M1-2 93 12 0.3
the two groups of samples displayed comparable M1-3 90 12 0.2
M1-4 90 7 0.3
behaviour in terms of the aggregate/binder percen- M2-2 90 14 0.4
tages. The samples are actually Si-rich aggregates, M2-3 90 14 0.3
essentially free of carbonates, and thus they are M10-2 89 8 0.2
resistant to acid attack. M10-3 86 8 0.2
M11-3 86 8 0.2
M11-5 87 9 0.3
Particle size analysis of the aggregate M11-6 87 9 0.4
In general the samples of Anadia are finer than Average 90 9 0.3
their Murtosa counterparts (Figs. 1 and 2). In the
Anadia samples three groups with different particle Insoluble residue
752 C. S. Costa et al.

FIG. 1. Particle size distribution curves of the Anadia samples.

viour can be explained by the mineralogical For a clearer interpretation of the results obtained
composition of the adobes; indeed the larger by X-ray sedigraph, the differences in Ø50 between
particles include mainly calcite, feldspars and iron the different groups of samples are presented in
hydroxides, which are susceptible to acid attack. Table 1. The average particle diameter of the
Hence they dissolve, thereby explaining the particle Anadia samples is larger than that of the Murtosa
size distribution differences with the acid attack. In samples.
the Murtosa samples there is a slight increase of the The results obtained for textural analysis
fraction of particles with diameter below 2 mm after represent only the adobes collected. It is important
dissolution. However the coarse fraction of the to note that there is a variety of adobes in the
adobes is heterogeneous (Fig. 4) due to the Aveiro district, suggesting that adobes with
variation of the mineralogy. It is considered that different particle size distributions than those
the Murtosa samples have some calcite ‘‘clusters’’ obtained in this study may be present.
affecting the particle size distribution of samples
after acid dissolution.
Methylene blue test
The results obtained by the X-ray sedigraph are
presented in Figs 5 and 6. The Anadia samples The methylene blue test was used to estimate the
consist of three groups between 2 and 15 mm percentage of the fraction 0 2 mm of the studied
(Fig. 5). The first group presents the largest adobes. The results obtained are listed in Table 1.
percentage of fine particles and the third group is The Anadia samples have a higher clay fraction
clearly coarser in size. The Murtosa samples form than the Murtosa samples, in accordance with the
two groups, the first consisting of particles over percentage of phyllosilicates determined from the
2 mm. (Fig. 6) mineralogical analysis (Table 2).

FIG. 2. Particle size distribution curves of the Murtosa samples.

 Adobe blocks from Aveiro, Portugal 753

FIG. 3. Particle size distribution curves of the Anadia samples after acid dissolution.

Mineralogy; X-ray diffraction (XRD)

to the Anadia adobes. The two groups of adobe
The mineralogical qualitative and semi-quantita- samples have in general the same amounts of
tive analysis of the Anadia and Murtosa groups of tectosilicates, namely quartz, plagioclase and
samples are presented in Table 2. In general the potassium feldspar. The Anadia adobes have a
two groups have different mineralogical composi- slightly higher percentage of iron oxides and
tions. hydroxides than the Murtosa adobes. The latter
The samples from both adobe groups contain are more abundant in sulfates (mainly anhydrite)
carbonates (calcite and traces of dolomite), those than their Anadia counterparts (42% and 22%
from Murtosa being richer (59%), probably respectively).
reflecting a higher percentage of added lime Samples belonging to the same building often
and/or the use of a distinct type of sand. Adobes have different mineralogical compositions. This
from Anadia contain a higher percentage of may be due to heterogeneity in adobe execution
phyllosilicates (40%) compared with their Murtosa and/or differential degradation of adobe samples
counterparts. located in distinct areas of external walls.
With respect to the clay mineralogical composi-
tion, the adobe samples consist essentially of
Water absorption and drying
kaolinite, illite and smectite (Table 3). Anadia
adobes have a higher percentage of kaolinite The water absorption rates of the Anadia and
(77%) and a small percentage of illite (13%). In Murtosa adobe groups are listed in Table 4. The
some samples (A2-1, A3-1, A3-2 and A8-1) chlorite capillary absorption coefficient of the samples was
is also present. The Murtosa adobes are chlorite free calculated using the tangent to the absorption curve
and have a lower kaolinite content (54%) compared prior to stabilization. Water absorption curves of

FIG. 4. Particle size distribution curves of the Murtosa samples after dissolution.
754 C. S. Costa et al.

FIG. 5. Particle size analysis by sedigraph, for the Anadia samples.

representative samples from the Anadia and because the calcite was not disseminated in the
Murtosa groups are shown in Fig. 7. Most of the adobe matrix. According to the Australian
Anadia samples show a greater water absorption Standard or Middleton (Vega et al., 2011), the
rate than the Murtosa samples. Although a great compressive strength for earthen materials should
heterogeneity in the values is observed, sample exceed 2 N/mm2. All but one Anadia adobe
A3-1 (Anadia group) has the highest capillary samples have a strength greater than 2 N/mm2;
absorption coefficient. This value is directly hence they meet this criterion. Sample A2-1 has a
dependent on the quantity and type of porosity compressive strength slightly lower than the
present in the samples. Adobes with a higher suggested value. In the Murtosa group only
capillary coefficient have a faster water intake and samples M1-3, M10-2, M11-3 meet the strength
may be more prone to degradation. Finally the criterion, the remaining samples developing lower
Anadia samples generally display a faster drying compressive strength than the reference value
capacity than the Murtosa samples and a more indicated in the standard.
homogeneous behaviour (Fig. 8).
Geelong test
Compressive strength tests
The results obtained for the Geelong test are
In general, the Anadia adobes are more resistant shown in Table 6. The water penetration is lower
than their Murtosa counterparts (Table 5). This for the adobes from Murtosa. The higher water
may be due to the fact that Anadia adobes have penetration in the Anadia adobes is attributed to
higher kaolinite content, and Murtosa adobes their more porous structure, because of their
contain lime clusters due to production conditions textural and mineralogical composition.

FIG. 6. Particle size analysis by sedigraph for the Murtosa samples.

 Adobe blocks from Aveiro, Portugal 755

TABLE 2. Mineralogical composition of samples (Anadia and Murtosa), in percentages.

Samples Phyllosilicates Tectosilicates Carbonates Iron oxides and Sulfates

hydroxides

Anadia A2-1 35 18 34 8 5
A2-2 35 19 44 0 2
A3-1 44 17 29 8 2
A3-2 47 11 35 5 2
A3-4 50 16 28 3 3
A8-1 39 16 36 7 2
A8-2 41 20 33 4 2
A8-3 28 20 45 2 5
A8-4 37 13 44 3 3
A8-5 48 7 38 7 0
Average 40 16.5 35.5 4.5 2

Murtosa M1-2 5 22 64 4 5
M1-3 15 18 62 0 5
M1-4 21 20 55 0 4
M2-2 8 25 63 1 3
M2-3 12 19 62 3 4
M10-2 27 8 59 4 2
M10-3 23 12 57 4 4
M11-3 21 12 57 7 3
M11-5 21 11 59 5 4
M11-6 22 15 53 7 3
Average 20 16 58 2 4

DISCUSSION
(in particular kaolinite) and the lower carbonate
The Anadia adobe samples display a more content in Anadia samples. The higher phyllosili-
homogeneous texture and a larger quantity of fine cate content contributes to a higher methylene blue
particles than the Murtosa samples. This is in adsorption value. The Murtosa samples are richer in
accordance with the higher phyllosilicate content carbonates, forming lime nodules in some samples,

TABLE 3. Clay minerals present in adobe samples (Anadia and Murtosa), in percentages.

——————— Anadia ——————— ——————— Murtosa ———————

Samples Smectite Kaolinite Chlorite Illite Samples Smectite Kaolinite Chlorite Illite

A2-1 Tr 70 30 tr M1-2 tr 31 0 69
A2-2 3 85 0 12 M1-3 0 0 0 100
A3-1 17 42 26 15 M1-4 22 65 0 13
A3-2 9 75 16 0 M2-2 tr Tr 0 100
A3-4 2 80 0 18 M2-3 100 Tr 0 tr
A8-1 Tr 91 9 0 M10-2 0 50 0 50
A8-2 Tr 100 tr tr M10-3 0 100 0 0
A8-3 0 93 0 7 M11-3 0 0 0 0
A8-4 0 68 0 32 M11-5 0 95 0 5
A8-5 0 71 0 29 M11-6 0 58 0 42
Average 2 77 8 13 Average 4 54 0 42
756 C. S. Costa et al.

TABLE 4. Capillarity absorption coefficient of adobe samples.

————— Anadia ————— ———— Murtosa ————

Sample Capillary absorption Sample Capillary absorption
coefficient (g/dm3.min1/2) coefficient (g/dm3.min1/2)

A2-1 3.1 M1-2 3.0

A2-2 – M1-3 7.0
A3-1 12.8 M1-4 2.6
A3-2 10.7 M2-2 2.4
A3-4 – M2-3 1.8
A8-1 4.4 M10-2 7.4
A8-2 8.4 M10-3 7.7
A8-3 7.3 M11-3 8.1
A8-4 – M11-5 9.2
A8-5 – M11-6 7.0
Average 7.9 Average 7.0

which may be detrimental for the mechanical the Murtosa samples. There seems to be no clear
behaviour of these adobes. link between the mineralogical composition and
The Anadia samples have a faster absorption rate mechanical strength, which is determined by the
than the Murtosa samples, most probably due to particle size distribution of the aggregate, compact-
their higher phyllosilicates content, the more ness and production procedure. Nevertheless, the
homogeneous texture and the larger amount of higher kaolinite content, which is used as additive
fine particles. Similarly, in the Geelong test results, to improve mechanical strength in polymers and
the penetration of water is higher in Anadia samples composites for industrial applications, may contri-
because of their higher porosity, due to their bute to the higher mechanical strength of the
textural and mineralogical composition. Anadia samples.
The Anadia samples display a higher mechanical Finally, from the performed tests it follows that
strength compared to their Murtosa counterparts, the durability of adobe as a construction material
which may be explained by the differences in prone to the action of water is not directly related to
compactness and by the presence of lime nodules in its mechanical strength.

FIG. 7. Characteristic water absorption curves of the FIG. 8. Characteristic drying curves of the two groups
Anadia and Murtosa adobe samples. of adobes.
 Adobe blocks from Aveiro, Portugal 757

TABLE 5. Compressive strengths of the two adobe Also, the Anadia samples have a faster water
groups (simple compression). absorption rate than Murtosa samples. Since adobes
are especially prone to degradation by the action of
—Anadia — —Murtosa — water, the Anadia samples may be less durable than
Sample N/mm2 Sample N/mm2 the Murtosa samples. However, the Anadia samples
display a higher mechanical strength than the
A2-1 1.97 M1-2 1.87 samples from Murtosa due to differences in
A2-2 2.05 M1-3 2.07 compactness and to the presence of lime nodules
A3-1 2.31 M1-4 1.61
in the Murtosa samples. All samples show good
A3-2 2.09 M2-2 1.25
A3-4 – M2-3 1.64 behaviour in terms of compressive strength tests,
A8-1 2.35 M10-2 2.52 and some samples have a high mechanical
A8-2 2.55 M10-3 1.4 resistance.
A8-3 3.43 M11-3 2.63 The phyllosilicate content, in particular kaolinite
A8-4 3.58 M11-5 1.93 abundance, makes a positive contribution to the
A8-5 2.39 M11-6 1.32 textural, absorption/drying and mechanical proper-
Average 2.52 Average 1.76 ties of the adobes.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
CONCLUSIONS
This research was financially supported by GeoBioTec
This study permitted the distinction of the main Geobiosciences, Geotechnologies and Geoengineering
characteristics of two groups of adobes (Anadia and Research Center (PEst-C/CTE/UI4035/2011).
Murtosa) used in Aveiro, Portugal. The most
important differences between these two groups of
REFERENCES
adobe samples pertain to the particle size distribu-
tion, the mineralogical composition, the water Burnough S. (2008) Soil Property Criteria for Rammed
absorption and the mechanical strength. The Earth Stabilization. DOI 10.1061/(ASCE)
Anadia samples are more homogeneous and have 0899 1561 web accessed in: http://funnel.sfsu.edu/
a greater quantity of fine particles than their students/englstda/courses/Students/Ryan%20Welch/
Murtosa counterparts. rammed%20earth%20soil%20property.pdf

TABLE 6. Geelong test results.

Samples Penetration of water Average penetration Average

(cm) of water (cm)

Anadia A2-1 3.35 3.35

A3-1 2.9
A3-2 2.63 2.77
A8-1 3.08 3.08 3.18
A8-2 3.25
A8-3 3.29 3.27

Murtosa M1-2 0.97

M1-3 1.9 1.55
M1-4 1.77
M2-3 1.83
M2-2 1.32 1.58
M10-2 2.1 1.58
M10-3 1.58 1.84
M11-3 1.43
M11-5 2 1.58
M11-6 1.32
758 C. S. Costa et al.

Calabria A.J., Vasconcelos W.L. & Boccaccini A.R. Professional Paper, 391-C, 1 31.
(2009) Miscrostructure and chemical degradation of Silva R.A., Oliveira D.V., Miranda T., Cristelo N.,
adobe and clay bricks. Ceramics International, 35, Escobar M.C. & Soares E. (2013) Rammed earth
665 671. construction with granitic residual soils: The case
Ciancio D., Jaquin P. & Walker P. (2013) Advances on study of northern Portugal. Construction and
the assessment of soil suitability for rammed earth. Building Materials, 47, 181 191.
Construction and Building Materials, 42, 40 47. Silveira D., Varum H., Costa A., Martins T., Pereira H.
Folk R.L. (1980) Petrology of Sedimentary Rocks. & Almeida J. (2012) Mechanical properties of adobe
Hemphill Publishing, Austin, TX, 184. bricks in ancient constructions. Construction and
Fratini F., Pecchioni E., Rovero L. & Tonietti U. (2011) Building Materials, 28, 36 44.
The earth in the architecture of the historical centre Thorez J. (1976) Practical Identification of Clay
of Lanezia Terme (Italy): Characterization for Minerals; A Handbook for Teachers and Students
restoration. Applied Clay Science, 53, 509 516. I. Clay Mineralogy, G. Lelotte, Dison, Belgique, 90.
Galhano C., Rocha F. & Gomes C. (1999) Geostatistical Torgal P.F. & Jalali S. (2012). Earth construction:
analysis of the influence of textural, mineralogical Lessons from the past for future eco-efficient
and geochemical parameters on the geotechnical construction. Construction and Building Materials,
behaviour of the ‘‘Argilas de Aveiro’’ formation 29, 512 519.
(Portugal). Clay Minerals, 34, 109 116. Vega P., Juan A., Guerra M.I., Morán J.M., Aguado P.J.
Mellinger R.M. (1979) Quantitative X-ray Diffraction & Llamas B. (2011) Mechanical characterisation of
Analysis of Clay Minerals. An Evaluation. traditional adobes from the north of Spain.
Saskatchenwan Research Council, Canada, SRC Construction and Building Materials, 25,
Report, G-79, 1 46. 3020 3023.
NP EN 933-9 (2002) Tests for geometrical properties of Veiga M.R. (2005) Characteristics of repair mortars for
aggregates, Part 9: Assessment of fines, Methylene historic buildings concerning water behaviour.
blue test, Portugal. Quantification and requirements. Pp. 25 28 in:
Oliveira A., Rocha F., Rodrigues A., Jouanneau, J., Dias Workshop on Repair Mortars for Historic Masonry,
A., Weber O. & Gomes C. (2002) Clay minerals TC RMH. Delft, RILEM.
from the sedimentary cover from the Northwest Velosa A., Coroado J., Veiga R., Ferreira V. & Rocha F.
Iberian shelf. Progress in Oceanography, 52, (2010) Characterization of ancient pozzolanic mor-
233 247. tars from Roman times to the nineteenth century.
Schultz L.G. (1964) Quantitative interpretation of Compatibility issues of new mortars with substrates
mineralogical composition from X-ray and chemical and ancient mortars, Materials in Historic
data for the Pierre Shale. U.S. Geological Survey, Structures, ISBN(13) : 9789048126835, 35 257.